• parpol@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    It is probably something stupid like Nintendo having a patent for “pocket” in names, since Pokemon is “pocket monsters”

    Patents in videogames should be banned.

      • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s genuinely not as simple as you think it is. You realize there was a time before modern patent law, yes?

          • Paradoxvoid@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            29
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            Patents are (at their core) a good thing. It protects little Jimmy Inventor from putting hours and his blood, sweat and tears into coming up with a novel invention, only for some big corpo to see it, steal the idea and bully Jimmy out of the market.

            Jimmy has legal recourse to sue the big corpo if he has a patent, whereas without one he has nothing.

            Just because the system’s been gamed (especially in the US) doesn’t mean it’s impossible to reform, and is currently still better than nothing.

            • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              2 months ago

              Patents are not, at their core, a good thing. They are nice for an idealized and transient scenario, but the reality of capitalism is that the vast, vast majority of investment, production, etc. are done by a handful of large companies, and that includes R&D. Patents are, in reality, overwhelmingly one of the many tools large corporations have to shut out upstarts. In short, it entrenches the power of monopolies, trusts, and similar large businesses.

              And that’s without even starting on how the law can be abused and, with the way our legal systems work, it is fundamentally more abusable for the side that has more money and can afford top corporate lawyers to concoct convenient arguments, leaving little Jimmy in the dust.

            • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Patents as well as intellectual property laws, are entirely unnatural and only exist to prop up Capital.

              Its against human nature to prevent cultural iteration.

              • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                Patents as well as intellectual property laws, are entirely unnatural and only exist to prop up Capital.

                Most people won’t understands this concept due to poor education they received. They will spout the propaganda that benefits their owner daddy and they will feel super smug about it too 🤡

            • Ferk@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              Yeah, it protects Jimmy from having to unconditionally contribute to society & its many organizations.

              It allows Jimmy to set conditions and control who can use it and who cannot. For example, he can ally with one particular big corpo (or even start building one himself) so they can hold that thing hostage and require agreements/fees for the use of that thing for a long long time.

              So now, instead of all people, including big (and small) corpos, having free access to the idea, only the friends of Jimmy will.

              The reality is that if it wasn’t for Jimmy, it’s likely that Tommy would have invented it himself anyway at some point (and even improved on it!). But now Tommy can’t work on the thing, cos Jimmy doesn’t wanna be his friend.

              So not only does it protect Jimmy from having to contribute to society without conditions, it also protects society from improving over what Jimmy decided to allow (some) people access to. No competition against Jimmy allowed! :D

              Even without patents, if the invention is useful I doubt the inventor will have problems making money. It would be one hell of a thing to have in their portfolio / CV. Many corpos are likely to want Jimmy in their workforce. Of course, he might not become filthy rich… but did Jimmy really deserve to be that much more richer than Tommy?

            • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              But patents for genetic beans, or drugs that the government or public institutions that we the public fucking pay for should be allowed.

            • Broken@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              I agree. The system is screwed up, but that doesn’t mean the intention was bad. Having no patent rights just means that whoever has more money will win. Big corps have the resources in both money and infrastructure to bring anything anybody else invents to market faster.

              So today, big corps win. If we do away with the system, then big corps win. The only solution is reform. Or consumer knowledge and the ability to resist buying something in protest (which has failed time and time again which is evident by the big corps existence).

          • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Sure, but how do you solve the problems that patents in turn solved (and brought new problems with them of course)? That as kinda my point, if we just ban patents we can just look back to know which problems we need to solve in another way.

    • SlothMama@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I agree, but I think all intellectual property laws should be repealed. I came to the conclusion that patent, copyright, and trademark are all varying levels of bad years ago and I think it clearly holds the human race and human progress back by limiting creative iteration.